Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2007/January/7
January 7 edit
Rename {{astro-stub}} to {{astronomy-stub}} edit
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was rename
Rename to more appropriate, and memorable, name. Mike Peel 11:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Seems sensible, especially given the possible ambiguity. Alai 01:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- sounds like a good idea to me, too. BTW, you original comment about this on a WSS talk page menttioned {{astro stub}} and {{Astronomy stub}}. Those two redirects should be deleted, since they don't adhere to the naming guidelines (I've marked them as such - neither is used, BTW). Grutness...wha? 05:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I had to think about this for a moment, but I support it. At first, I thought that the only other thing that "astro" could stand for was astrology, which I thought probably does not have its own stub template. Then I realized that "astro" could also stand for astronomer, which does have a stub template. The move therefore makes sense. Dr. Submillimeter 09:41, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- There's quite a few meanings at astro, and there's also an existing Cat:Astrogeology stubs type... fed from {{crater-stub}}, just to confuse matters. Alai 02:04, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. WilliamKF 19:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename. Definitely avoids confusion. ~ Amalas rawr =^_^= 14:56, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. Current name is concise and on-target. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 03:41, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename per Amalas Kamope | userpage | talk | contributions 12:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename makes sense to me. "Astro" brings to mind astronautics, rather than astronomy. — RJH (talk) 22:54, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename. Why not. Nick Mks 17:47, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.